Swiftly following the conclusion of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) China trip, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office unveiled 10 new policy measures for Taiwan.
The measures, covering youth exchanges, agricultural and fishery imports, resumption of certain flights and cultural and media cooperation, appear to offer “incentives” for cross-strait engagement. However, viewed within the political context, their significance lies not in promoting exchanges but in redefining who is qualified to represent Taiwan in dialogue with China.
First, the policy statement proposes a “normalized communication mechanism” between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This would shift cross-strait interaction from government-to-government negotiations to party-level engagement.
The issue is that aviation rights, quarantine rules, tourism and infrastructure fall within public authority and should be handled through formal, reciprocal mechanisms. Instead, China is pushing a policy with KMT endorsement, seeking to bypass Taiwan’s democratically elected government through alternative political channels.
Second, the 10 measures continue Beijing’s practice of “selective opening.” Agricultural and fishery access and food market provisions come with political preconditions. This ties economic opportunity to political positions, destabilizing markets and exposing Taiwanese businesses to risk.
While Beijing can open access quickly, it can also restrict it under administrative or technical pretexts, making such “incentives” potential structural vulnerabilities.
Third, the timing coincides with Taiwan’s upcoming local elections in November. Through KMT-CCP engagement, Beijing signals that if its political conditions are accepted, exchanges and benefits could resume, while implying the current government is responsible for the deadlock.
This framing deepens political polarization in Taiwan and reflects Beijing’s united front strategy.
The deeper issue is that the KMT-CCP meeting and the 10 measures erode the institutional basis for equal cross-strait interaction.
When parties replace the government as the primary channel, when exchanges are tied to unilateral political conditions and when Beijing can decide who represents Taiwan, democratic mandate and institutional legitimacy are weakened. Without equality, peace and progress become an illusion.
Wang Hung-jen is a professor in National Cheng Kung University’s Department of Political Science.
Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
Taiwan’s higher education system is facing an existential crisis. As the demographic drop-off continues to empty classrooms, universities across the island are locked in a desperate battle for survival, international student recruitment and crucial Ministry of Education funding. To win this battle, institutions have turned to what seems like an objective measure of quality: global university rankings. Unfortunately, this chase is a costly illusion, and taxpayers are footing the bill. In the past few years, the goalposts have shifted from pure research output to “sustainability” and “societal impact,” largely driven by commercial metrics such as the UK-based Times Higher Education (THE) Impact
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
The inter-Korean relationship, long defined by national division, offers the clearest mirror within East Asia for cross-strait relations. Yet even there, reunification language is breaking down. The South Korean government disclosed on Wednesday last week that North Korea’s constitutional revision in March had deleted references to reunification and added a territorial clause defining its border with South Korea. South Korea is also seriously debating whether national reunification with North Korea is still necessary. On April 27, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung marked the eighth anniversary of the Panmunjom Declaration, the 2018 inter-Korean agreement in which the two Koreas pledged to
I wrote this before US President Donald Trump embarked on his uneventful state visit to China on Thursday. So, I shall confine my observations to the joint US-Philippine military exercise of April 20 through May 8, known collectively as “Balikatan 2026.” This year’s Balikatan was notable for its “firsts.” First, it was conducted primarily with Taiwan in mind, not the Philippines or even the South China Sea. It also showed that in the Pacific, America’s alliance network is still robust. Allies are enthusiastic about America’s renewed leadership in the region. Nine decades ago, in 1936, America had neither military strength
RSS